I would guess that the senses of our higher self (our spirit) would posses qualities that are free of an adaptation to a particular context, such as the dimension we inhabit while in our physical bodies, and the sensors we have adapted to help us survive on this physical plane, I often read peoples experiences of OBE's and they describe it as if they had gained ultimate sensory perception, like they have become in tune with the entire universe, well, in tune with reality might be a better way of describing it, well, both, and they often develop types of psychic powers, they become connected to their own, and surrounding energy systems on a higher level, the sensory inflow can often be so vivid and overwhelming for some people, that when they do achieve an OBE for the first time, they are shocked back into their physical body. I have achieved an OBE once, when I least expected it, I wasn't even trying, and I hadn't been recently, I just woke up one night, floating on the other side of my room, it took me a second to wake up properly and realize what was going on, but when I did, I was shocked, and suddenly shot up in my bed, during the moment after I realized, which was extremely short, I felt interconnected with the entire universe, everything around, and like energy was flowing in and out of my being, and I could just "feel" things a lot more....well I can't think of a way to explain it, but hopefully you understand what I'm trying to express...my conscious OBE lasted for a very short time, and every day, the memory and feelings I had during that spectacular moment are fading away, it's something I really want to achieve again.

Language Games:)

To speak of a consciousness with no context/environment makes no sense, subject and object are mutually depended, a subject without its object has no consciousness for there would be nothing to be conscious about. A sharp knife is sharp only relative to the density of your own body/biology. You speak of sensation, "What would sensation be like in a context free of a knife is unfathomable to humans". No it is not unfathomable, there would be no sensation, no object no consciousness. You are inseparable from your environment, indeed, you are one with your environment, there simply is no other possiablity.The metaphysical to me is just those functions of our biologies that remain a mystery but are left open to reasonable speculation. Example, how is it that we feel compassion for another person or animal.

True, To speak of a consciousness with no context/environment makes no sense, and the spirit does exist in an environment, but that environment is a realm where things can be seen at the most, absolute, fundamental level, and I do believe everything is connected, at the most fundamental level, and we can receive and give energies to any sub-system (eg. other humans, other beings) that makes up the whole system (ie. the universe). Your being is made of the most pure energy, this is the energy that makes up your consciousness, whether there is a physical brain for that energy to flow through, or not, this energy makes up our entire universe at the most fundamental level. I'm am indeed saying that there is an environment in which the consciousness requires no sensory adaptation, that this environment is so fundamental, that adaptation is unnecessary, you realize that you are in fact, a part of this environment, and you can interact with your surrounding environment without adaptation to it, as the environment and you, are one, and you now understand, without really understanding, how to manipulate and communicate with other parts of your fellow environment. Well, that's just my opinion on things.

Ghost:)

Perhaps some examples then would help to clearify this communication within an alternate evironment that one does not have to be adapted to. I realize there is a good deal that is not immediately apparent about consciousness and reality but in order to get a grasp on what you infer, an example/s would be most helpful.

It's not that it is an alternate environment at all, it's that your perspective on this environment has changed. Your physical body is also a part of this environment, but your perspective and senses have adapted in a context where things need to appear separate, as this is the most efficient way of perceiving things in our physical form. Now, when we leave behind our physical body, no such perceptive restrictions exist, we can very easily open our subconscious mind, which understands the universe on a much deeper level. It is said, that upon death, we have a great mental awakening and transformation, that is unnecessary while in our physical form, so you might say, that the only only adaption needed without a physical body, is conscious understanding of the reality and environment we exist in, as you say, there is a good deal that is not immediately apparent about consciousness and reality. Anyway, since I have only ever achieved a conscious OBE for a split second, and I can hardly recall the wonderful sensations I felt, I can not really give you an example of how communication with our fellow environment works, although I'm sure my subconscious could describe things a lot better if I had access to it, but I can give you what I think are examples of the process in action, they are things like: telepathy, remote viewing, psychokinesis/telekinesis etc. The enormous sensory perception gained is an outcome of understanding things at the most fundamental level, and being able to receive, understand, tap into, and feel the energy that flows in and out of your being, which is why a lot of these skills can be gained while still in your physical form. They aren't as much senses as just being able to understand, receive and give energies to your fellow environment. It's really hard to explain my thoughts on the subject, but I hope you made some sense of that...I was writing a paper on how the mind can manipulate reality, how the universe is an extremely complex, chaotic "web" of interconnected energy, and how we can extract energy from what I like to call "the Aether of nothingness", which is where all the energy in our universe came from. I used the following analogy:

"Remember that one little change in a chaotic system (a change in thought) will result in big changes throughout the whole system, your change will resonate throughout the system, down it's limbs, into it's roots and finally into the Aether of nothingness from which the tree of life sucks it's essence"

Ghost,

Thanks for that Ghost, a little something I wrote some time back, It is a dreamy moving not quite thing, only the illusion is the grasp of the ring. An old saying is, "It is the unknown which supports the known". Thanks again for your efforts!!

No probs:) "only the illusion is the grasp of the ring" - I like that.

I think biologists would disagree with that. Sensations are biologically mediated, and the biological process of sensation doesn't have a purpose in mind. It so happens that the avoidance of sharp edges results in survival, and it should come as no surprise that a fish or a lizard would avoid a sharp knife as well.

The field of biology is of sensual origin, like astronomy, chemistry, physics, and even mathematics, albeit less directly. "Facts of biology' are thoughts, not realities existing independent of thoughts, as far we know anyhow.

BrightNoon,

Could you expand on that thought, perhaps clearify. Does the meaning come down to, in the absence of the subject there is no consciousness of biological facts. It seems a somewhat puzzling statement to me.

When we refer to 'the world,' are we talking about something we know about or something about which we have no knowledge? If the latter, the term is meaningless, like gootedgross, because we have no knowledge of what gootedgross is. If 'the world' refers to everything we know of, then 'the world' consists of our knowledge. There might be a world beyond the known human reality, but we cannot know that with certainty! We only know what we know; we can only talk about what we know. The biological structures that we talk about do not exist beyond our knowledge of them, as far as we know; i.e. biology consists of a certain category of knowledge, not facts of a reality beyond human understanding. In other words, 'biology' consists of thoughts. Cells do not exist except as the idea, 'cells.' Even if you are unwilling to accept that their may not be any external reality, you have to recognize that the way in which we divide the world (into organisms, cells, molecules, etc) is arbitrary. Lines can be drawn anywhere, with equal justification. The world exists, but biology does not refer to the world as such, but rather to an ideological system by which we organize the world: i.e. to our own method of conceptual division.

"What about sensation," you ask yourself. In my view, thoughts are composed of sensations. Thoughts are complexes of sensation: sensations in relation to one another, forming very complex structures. That's another debate, but for the sake of argument, assume that's true, and you see why I say 'biology' is a product of sensation.

To clarify, here are some examples of other things which are products of sensation in the same way: the memory of that day at the beach in 1999, the dream you had about your 11th grade teacher (hubba), the mental image an architect has of the house he wants to build.

BrightNoon,

Yes I believe I understand fully, the world we do know, apparent reality is a biological readout, indeed I do not think even today that they can prove that the physcial world actually exists, altimate reality is said to exist and common sense would say that it does, it is that physical stimulus that our bodies are not capable of interpreting. Do tell me if I am off the mark, but, biology like everything else must be considered cognitive property, it may or may not be, as our interpretation tells us it is, all we can be reasonable sure of is that it is a result of outer stimulus and the process of our understanding. Ok, I believe I understand you now, but if not please correct.

Sorry about the duplication don't really know how that came about.

Thats it. If we define 'the external world' as that which lies beyond our experience/knowledge, then by definition it is impossible to know anything about it, including whether it exists at all. All our knowledge of 'the objective world/the material world' is just that, our knowledge. Conceptualized visions of nature are facts of our experience, not facts of 'nature' if nature (the external world) exists.

I may seem to be redundently saying the same thing, but repeating the phrases help I think, because its all about language anyway. There is no condtradiction, paradox or confusion in reality; those are just consequences our our search for something that doesen't exist: the Truth, with a capital T. I think Camus calls this the absurd: the search for absolute meaning, external justification or explanation, in a world devoid of meaning, and outide of which there is nothing in terms of which it could be justified or explained. I digress...:bigsmile: